Catholic delegates from across the globe gathered last week to kick off the final phases of the global Synod on Synodality, a years-long project initiated by Pope Francis and projected to conclude in October of 2024. The ambitious, ill-defined synodal endeavor has yielded cheers from leftist “Catholics,” the sounding of alarm bells from right-wing grifters, and stupefied bafflement from faithful Catholics actually studying what’s going on. Although there is reason to fear the hijacking of the Synod by leftist priests and prelates, perhaps the gathering’s most glaring achievement — at least thus far — is the revelation of Pope Francis’s chameleonic nature.

Pope Francis is unlikely to be remembered as a Pontiff fond of clarity or prone to it. Many of the definitive statements he has made have been technically in accord with the Church’s perennial and immutable doctrines on faith and morals, but eliciting even such only-technically-correct statements from Francis has proven difficult. For example, after the publication of the Pope’s 2016 letter Amoris Laetitia, a series of dubia was submitted by four cardinals (two of whom, Carlo Caffara and Joachim Meisner, are now dead) asking the Pope to clarify several ambiguous points in his document, including comments made on the nature of evil, on habitual sin, and on divorce and remarriage. Those dubia have still not been answered. (READ MORE from S.A. McCarthy: The Pope and the Sprawling Vatican Embezzlement Trial)

Ahead of the Synod’s meeting, several conservative-minded cardinals — including Raymond Burke and Walter Brandmüller, who had signed their names to the Amoris Laetitia dubia — submitted a new list of dubia to Pope Francis. The Pope’s response to those dubia, and especially the reaction from both secular and Catholic media and influencers, has led many to believe or suggest that Francis is actually opening the door to blessing same-sex unions, a practice the Catholic Church has long condemned. It came as something of a surprise, particularly given the still-deafening silence from 2016, when Burke and Brandmüller — joined by Cardinals Robert Sarah, Joseph Zen, and Juan Sandoval Íñiguez — received an answer, published by the Vatican this month, to their latest dubia. The faithful cardinals posed questions regarding the final phases of the global Synod on Synodality, a subject which has raised much concern among devout Catholics over the past few years, and especially as of late.

Synods are nothing new in the life of the Church. The term “synod” comes from the Greek word for “meeting,” just as the term “council” comes from the Latin word for “meeting.” Like councils, synods are comprised predominantly of bishops, though priests, religious, and even lay theologians may be invited to participate — but while a council is convened to discuss doctrinal matters of faith and morals and has a binding authority upon the laity, synods are more common events typically called to address issues of administration, communication, or organization.

Although derided by some conservative Catholics, the Synod on Synodality’s “listening sessions” are also not an entirely novel innovation. Instead, they are rooted in the idea of the sensus fidelium, the “sense of the faithful.” The Catechism of the Catholic Church defines the sensus fidelium as “the supernatural appreciation of faith on the part of the whole people, when, from the bishops to the last of the faithful, they manifest a universal consent in matters of faith and morals.” It is, however, important to note two key aspects here: first, that “universal consent in matters of faith and morals” must be in accord with the established doctrines of the Church, not in contradiction to them; and second, the sensus fidelium, by definition, does not include those who are not faithful to the Church, such as ex-Catholics, non-Catholics, and even non-Christians, all of whom were included in the Synod on Synodality’s “listening sessions.”

What of Gay Marriage?

There are several matters the Synod on Synodality intends to debate in these final stages, including the question of whether or not to offer blessings for same-sex unions, a practice which has been advocated and even enacted by leftists within the ranks of the Church’s hierarchy. This led the dubia cardinals to ask the Pope whether the Synod may result in an adjustment or dilution of the Church’s longstanding moral teachings on the disordered and sinful nature of homosexuality. Thus, they first asked “whether the Divine Revelation should be reinterpreted in the Church according to the cultural changes of our time, and the new anthropological vision promoted by these changes. Or if, on the contrary, the Divine Revelation is binding forever, immutable, and therefore not to be contradicted.” (READ MORE: Controversial Conservative Bishop Retiring)

In a dazzling display of his hallmark ambiguity, Pope Francis basically answered yes and no, writing, “The answer depends on the meaning you give to the word ‘reinterpret.’ If it is understood as ‘interpret better,’ the expression is valid.” He went on to explain that Catholic doctrine cannot be changed in the sense that what is one day doctrinally forbidden may the next day be permitted, but he emphasized that doctrine is always being clarified further and further throughout the life of the Church. As an example, he cited Pope Nicholas V’s 1452 papal bull permitting the practice of slavery, pointing out that as Catholic doctrine on human dignity developed further, Pope Nicholas V’s declarations on slavery were found to be in contradiction to doctrine. Once again, the Pope’s answer is technically correct, but still does not definitively address the point of concern raised by the cardinals.

The next question the cardinals asked was whether the Synod has the authority to greenlight blessing same-sex unions. The Pope responded, “The Church has a very clear understanding of marriage: an exclusive, stable, and indissoluble union between a man and a woman, naturally open to procreation. Only this union can be called ‘marriage.’” He continued:

It is not just a matter of names, but the reality we call marriage has a unique essential constitution that requires an exclusive name, not applicable to other realities. It is undoubtedly much more than a mere “ideal.” For this reason, the Church avoids any type of rite or sacramental that might contradict this conviction and suggest that something that is not marriage is recognized as marriage.

This is in keeping not only with the Church’s perennial moral teachings, but even with Pope Francis’s own statements on the subject. In 2021, as bishops in Germany debated whether or not they could or should offer blessings for same-sex couples, the Pope signed a document from the Vatican’s doctrine office clarifying that the Church “does not and cannot bless sin.” That document explained that blessings are sacramentals, which are meant to be shadows of the sacraments and to prepare the soul to receive the graces conferred through the sacraments. Since same-sex unions cannot be considered analogous to the sacrament of marriage, those unions cannot be blessed. (READ MORE: The Synodal Spirit: Dissent Against Doctrine)

In his dubia response, the Pope continued to say that “pastoral prudence must adequately discern whether there are forms of blessing, requested by one or more persons, that do not convey a mistaken concept of marriage.” He added, “For when a blessing is requested, it is expressing a plea to God for help, a supplication to live better, a trust in a Father who can help us live better.” This response is what has led to so many on both the Left and Right crying that Pope Francis is endorsing blessing same-sex unions.

But this addendum must be read in light of the Pope’s 2021 response to the same question, which clarified that the Church “does not preclude the blessings given to individual persons with homosexual inclinations, who manifest the will to live in fidelity to the revealed plans of God as proposed by Church teaching. Rather, it declares illicit any form of blessing that tends to acknowledge their unions as such.” Francis clarified then that, if offered to a same-sex couple, “the blessing would manifest not the intention to entrust such individual persons to the protection and help of God … but to approve and encourage a choice and a way of life that cannot be recognized as objectively ordered to the revealed plans of God.”

Unlike the 2021 document issued by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, the Pope’s latest dubia response reveals that, while technically adhering to Catholic teaching, he is in some sense “all things to all men,” or at least trying to be. To faithful Catholics careful enough to read what he actually wrote, Francis is affirming the Church’s longstanding doctrines and moral teachings. To poorly-catechized Catholics who think that “being nice” is the zenith of Christian virtue, Francis is encouraging that all-important secular virtue called “inclusion.” To LGBTQ and leftist “Catholics” itching to see same-sex unions recognized as a sacrament, Francis is seemingly leaving the door open to that possibility.

Shortly before his death, the late Cardinal George Pell declared the Synod on Synodality a “toxic nightmare,” a phrase he had used previously to describe Francis’s pontificate. Indeed, the reigning Pontiff does seem to be a series of contradictions. He praises “inclusivity” and derides “rigidity,” but enacts and enforces draconian restrictions on the Tridentine Mass as celebrated by faithful Catholics. He advances a “collegial” and almost democratic approach to the decidedly-un-democratic Church through the Synod, but acts almost as a dictator in his own diocese. He upholds Catholic truth, but never as clearly as it has been upheld in the past. Eventually, when the Synod officially concludes in October of next year and the Vatican offers its final statements on issues discussed, Francis will have to choose only one thing to be to all men. The question is which one he will choose.